• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Global warming discussion III

Status
Not open for further replies.
Strangely Piers is put to the test here by a fellow weather forecaster who doesn't seem to be as impressed as Haig.

I only sped read the article and comments but did come up with this littke gem which shows how Piers works out his succese rate .
I note that Piers is declaring this period (13/14) a success on the Weather Action website.
http://www.weatheraction.com/displayarticle.asp?a=472&c=5
Three things are being used to confirm the forecast:
i) A Facebook conversation about storms in Seattle – the forecast does mention ‘some thunder’ for this area.
ii) A very misleading headline “BIGGEST hail for 30 years” The link leads to a posting by a resident of Everett who had never seen hail of the size shown, the photograph shows a not very large piece of hail in the hand of a young boy.
iii)Finally a couple of Severe Thunder Warnings are used to confirm the forecast. I see no evidence that these warnings materialised into actual storms.
Click to expand...
 
Anyone who makes enough weather predictions is going to be right occasionally, even if their guesses are completely random. Add a modicum of common sense (i.e. occasionally predict gales in Autumn in areas which are prone to Autumn gales etc) and enough hits will be produced to impress someone who's gullible enough to ignore the misses.

It's not clear if Corbyn is basing his predictions on a model of some kind or if he's just making intelligent guesses, but either way his results are not particularly impressive. If he's just guessing then the fact that he's a denier is going to make his hit rate worse than chance, his prediction in early 2011 that the British spring of that year would be colder than average only for it to turn out to be the warmest in the 350 year CET record being a case in point.
 
Pixel42 said:
It's not clear if Corbyn is basing his predictions on a model of some kind or if he's just making intelligent guesses, but either way his results are not particularly impressive.
Click to expand...


Here is the man himself explaining about the Sun - Earth connection and a bit of how his method works.

Piers Corbyn: The Reality of Long Range Weather and Climate Forecasting | EU2014
Published on 29 Apr 2014
In his talk, Piers Corbyn described the failure of standard meteorology (SM) in outlook, theory, and practice. He included: signals in real meteorology data unexplained by SM; real role of jet stream, stratosphere, electro-jets, magnetosphere, solar wind, solar corona, and the Moon; the total inability of SM to explain: sudden stratospheric warmings and its consequences, tropical storm intensifications, angular momentum concentration in tornadoes; and the need for something else such as electromagnetic plasma explanations; the theoretical basis of non-standard long range weather forecasting on a real planet; a summary on his WeatherAction forecasting skill and examples; and the future of forecasting and meteorology, climate 'science' and science in general.

Piers Corbyn began recording weather and climate patterns at the age of five, constructing his own observation equipment. He obtained a first-class honors degree in physics at Imperial College London. In 1969, he became the first president of the Imperial College Students' Union to be directly elected by the student body. He later studied astrophysics in 1979 at Queen Mary College, London, and then began examining the relationship between Earth's weather and climate and solar activity. Following many years of weather prediction as an occupation, Piers formed WeatherAction in 1995, where he sells web-accessible long-range monthly forecasts for Britain and Ireland, Europe, and the USA plus special forecasts of 'Red Weather periods' and related increases in thunder/tornado and earthquake risk.
www.weatheraction.com
Click to expand...


macdoc said:
more

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...lf-will-be-gone-by-2020-Nasa-report-says.html
Click to expand...


Then there is the reality of unprecedented growing sea ice surrounding Antarctica ...

Robot Sub Finds Surprisingly Thick Antarctic Sea Ice
The robot sub surveys, which were spot-checked by drilling and shipboard tests, suggest Antarctica's average ice thickness is considerably higher than previous estimates. On average, the thickness of the ice was 4.6 to 18 feet (1.4 to 5.5 m). In the three regions it surveyed, the robot sub found that deformed, thickened ice accounted for at least half of and as much as 76 percent of the total ice volume, the researchers report.

"Our study shows that we're probably missing some of this thick ice, and we need to try to account for that when we try to compare what we see in models and satellites to what we see in the field," Maksym said.

The thickest ice measured during the survey was about 65 feet (20 m) thick, in the Bellingshausen Sea, Maksym told Live Science. In the Weddell Sea, the maximum ice thickness hit more than 45 feet (14 m), and offshore of Wilkes Land, the ice was about 53 feet (16 m) thick.
Click to expand...


Antarctic Sea Ice May Force Research Stations to Move
Growing sea ice surrounding Antarctica could prompt scientists to consider relocating research stations on the continent, according to the operations manager of the Australian Antarctic Division.

Rob Wooding said that resupplying Australia's Mawson Station -- the longest continuously operated outpost in Antarctica -- relied on access to a bay, a task increasingly complicated by sea ice blocking the way.

"We are noticing that the sea ice situation is becoming more difficult," Wooding told a media briefing on Monday ahead of two days of meetings between top Antarctic science and logistics experts in Hobart, the capital of Tasmania.
Click to expand...
 
Can we please keep Corbyns astrology drivel to the other thread? This one is supposed to be about science.
 
Two points ...

Mikemcc said:
Can we please keep Corbyns astrology drivel to the other thread?
Click to expand...
Others keep raising questions about him and It's just polite to answer :D

This one is supposed to be about science.
Click to expand...
Corbyn is a scientist don't you know :D

"He obtained a first-class honors degree in physics at Imperial College London. In 1969, he became the first president of the Imperial College Students' Union to be directly elected by the student body. He later studied astrophysics in 1979 at Queen Mary College, London, and then began examining the relationship between Earth's weather and climate and solar activity."

Have a nice day :)
 
Haig said:
Here is the man himself explaining about the Sun - Earth connection and a bit of how his method works.
Click to expand...
That's just how he claims to produce his forecasts. It's obviously nonsense, intelligent guesswork would be more likely to produce a few hits.

Mikemcc said:
Can we please keep Corbyns astrology drivel to the other thread? This one is supposed to be about science.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, you're quite right. I won't respond to it again.
 
Haig said:
...Corbyn is a scientist don't you know :D

"He obtained a first-class honors degree in physics at Imperial College London. In 1969, he became the first president of the Imperial College Students' Union to be directly elected by the student body. He later studied astrophysics in 1979 at Queen Mary College, London, and then began examining the relationship between Earth's weather and climate and solar activity."

Have a nice day :)
Click to expand...

Can you provide compelling evidence supporting the accuracy of any of these much-copied assertions? Likewise, an explanation of which, if any, of these factors you feel actually qualifies Mr. Corbyn as "a scientist," would be nice. I don't see any of the three things mentioned as being supportive of the claims that he is an astrophysicist, meteorologist, nor a Solar physicist, as he is most often listed. Physicist (assuming that degree can be verified and confirmed) would be an interesting achievement given his claims and statements, but does not, prima facie, indicate that he is "a scientist."
 
Haig said:
Two points ...


Others keep raising questions about him and It's just polite to answer :D


Corbyn is a scientist don't you know :D

"He obtained a first-class honors degree in physics at Imperial College London. In 1969, he became the first president of the Imperial College Students' Union to be directly elected by the student body. He later studied astrophysics in 1979 at Queen Mary College, London, and then began examining the relationship between Earth's weather and climate and solar activity."

Have a nice day :)
Click to expand...
Woo hoo, makes me a scientist too...! Except I don't carry out research and publish my results either.
 
Mikemcc said:
Can we please keep Corbyns astrology drivel to the other thread? This one is supposed to be about science.
Click to expand...

apologies and quite right.

I'm much easier to troll prior to my morning cup of neuro-stim.
 
Mikemcc said:
Woo hoo, makes me a scientist too...! Except I don't carry out research and publish my results either.
Click to expand...

Actually, the definition of a scientist is simple and he does qualify :p

Scientist - scientist, in a broad sense, is one engaging in a systematic activity to acquire knowledge. In a more restricted sense, a scientist may refer to an individual who uses the scientific method.[1] The person may be an expert in one or more areas of science"

scientist - " a person who studies or practises any of the sciences or who uses scientific methods"

These are just two sources - No need to apologize - end of story :D
 
Nah, he still blows it. Astrology isn't a science.

I think it's time for a block because I'm getting tired of the astrology spam, and will help me follow my own advice.
 
Last edited:
Mikemcc said:
The loss of the ice shelf isn't directly harmful as it is already floating. Unfortunately it will mean that the glacier feeding it will flow faster, and that is directly harmful in terms of sea level rise.
Click to expand...

Mmm could that be caused by this volcanic action ????

Scientists Discover Undersea Volcano Off Antarctica

New Underwater Volcano Found

Anyway, there is an unprecedented amount of sea ice in the Antarctic with no sign of stopping and it's a lot thicker than they thought. Didn't you see my post HERE or just scroll up the page ;)

Growing sea ice surrounding Antarctica could prompt scientists to consider relocating research stations on the continent, according to the operations manager of the Australian Antarctic Division.
Click to expand...
 
Haig said:
Mmm could that be caused by this volcanic action ????

Scientists Discover Undersea Volcano Off Antarctica

New Underwater Volcano Found

Anyway, there is an unprecedented amount of sea ice in the Antarctic with no sign of stopping and it's a lot thicker than they thought. Didn't you see my post HERE or just scroll up the page ;)
Click to expand...

Depends who you want to believe. If you listen to reputable scientists then putting billions of tonnes of a greenhouse gas into the atmosphere every year has a lot to do with it. If you believe what you read in libitarian blogs then it's anything but co2. I'm sure that you will continue to peďdle the least scientific explanations Haig but I really don't think you are daft enough to believe the nonsense that you keep coming out with.
 
Anyway, there is an unprecedented amount of sea ice in the Antarctic with no sign of stopping and it's a lot thicker than they thought. Didn't you see my post HERE or just scroll up the page
Click to expand...

Why is that Haig ??...in your own words. Explain it.

How do you square it up with these measured changes??

20121230_Icesheet_mass_balance_2009_fig2.gif


I really don't think you understand the scale of energies involved in melting a couple hundre cubic KM of ice if you think a volcano can do it.

"In all, Mount St. Helens released 24 megatons of thermal energy, 7 of which was a direct result of the blast. This is equivalent to 1,600 times the size of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima" (U.S. Geological Survey).
Click to expand...

But AGW is inflicting 4,000 Hiroshimas a day of thermal energy on Greenland alone.

Once more your inability to understand scale of energies is hilariously wrong....magnitudes wrong.
 
Last edited:
Haig said:
Here is the man himself ...
Click to expand...
at a conference full of Velikovsky cranks, Haig :jaw-dropp! So we know that Piers Corbyn has lost touch with reality enough to be fooled into appearing at a crank conference.

There is the reality that Antarctica is not the entire world and sea ice is not the only ice on the planet that seems to have escaped you. Some relevant science for you, Haig:
Why is southern sea ice increasing?
Antarctic sea ice has been growing over the last few decades but it certainly is not due to cooling - the Southern Ocean has shown warming over same period. Increasing southern sea ice is due to a combination of complex phenomena including cyclonic winds around Antarctica and changes in ocean circulation.
Click to expand...
Is Antarctica losing or gaining ice?
Satellites measure Antarctica is gaining sea ice but losing land ice at an accelerating rate which has implications for sea level rise.
Click to expand...
The Ice isn't melting myth
Ice mass loss is occuring at an accelerated rate in Greenland, Antarctica and globally from inland glaciers. Arctic sea ice is also falling at an accelerated rate. The exception to this ice loss is Antarctic sea ice which has been growing despite the warming Southern Ocean. This is due to local factors unique to the area.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom